Licklobster

iTrader: (1)

no? lol?

captain america

iTrader: (12)

Do you have a source for the info?

kgombe

iTrader: (13)

Lee Martin said so in a post

kgombe

iTrader: (13)

yes it was still 3D printed parts.. But that would be arms and so on..

captain america

iTrader: (12)

Found it! See the comment by Kevin Mendes.

So not broken shockS, but a broken shock end, which you see happen on every single brand, and according to Lee the only failure he had all week. I'd say that's bloody good.

kgombe

iTrader: (13)

I agree, some folks just looking for anything to say and prove that the car was not good..

I just ignore them for the most part..

Licklobster

iTrader: (1)

broken shockS, but you know, whatever pr it takes to sell a dream to people who are willing to buy it, i guess.

kgombe

iTrader: (13)

I’m assuming you saw the shocks broken, because all reports said shock ends…

but anything to trash something right??

Max Rackstraw

3D printed parts will reduce the integrity of the whole model realistically. Do you know exactly which parts are printed?

Has anybody broken a shock end or "shockS" on a car that you run or have ran?

What im saying is, we have a sample size of one here, we cannot therefore establish whether this breakage was an unlucky fluke or a trend of a flawed design. We certainly cannot try making assumptions to fill the gaps.

We can all have opinions on the matter however... They just need a reason based on previously seen facts. My personal opinion, wrong or right, is that this breakage is more likely just a fluke due to the understood fact that the car is running 3d printed parts in a fast paced race where lots could go wrong. No other car had this handicap.

I have to acknowledge however, once again due to us only having a sample size of one, you could easily argue that this breakage was due to a fault in the design. That however is just an assumption based on no fact other than this design is different. I have not yet actually heard a fact about this car that causes the shock assembly to be weaker than a car with shock standing up. I believe realistically we need to see the breakage clearly to be able to say why it happened. If you do have a fact to base your opinion on that the car broke a shock because of a flawed design then please let us know because so far nobody has provided one.

Sir 51D3WAYS

This shock layout puts me in mind of the new generation of ultra-low profile/CG touring cars. Maybe we will see an LCG revolution of buggies?

For years I have been wondering why buggies had to have stupid towers that stick up, get dirty and break.

And for the record, a broken shock ball end is A LOT easier to replace than a tower. I only wish they extended the nose and tail of the shell to cover the shocks. (less dirt)

Licklobster

iTrader: (1)

the problem isnt the shocks are weaker, the problem is the shock body is the point of impact on the front end. Even a little mushroom shield to protect them from impact would probably pay dividends (the aftermarket will provide no doubt)

Max Rackstraw

That is a valid observation, but it didn't seem to cause any problems at the worlds

Cain

iTrader: (294)

Pre-orders are up for the new N1

https://www.nemoracingusa.com/produc...tion-buggy-kit

foampervert

iTrader: (5)

But I do wonder though… wouldn’t changing lower suspension pills cause the unequal droop and things?

baconracer

I've been trying to work this out too, it would also put the shocks at an angle looking down if the the kickup is changed.